2020 (9) TMI 1294 - HC - Indian Laws

Removal of a set of counsel, who represented the DDCA before the Supreme Court - HELD THAT - The respondents have long concluded their arguments. Indeed, the appellant is in the process of concluding its rejoinder arguments. The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellant with the new set of counsel, submits that she be heard as the counsel who have thus far appeared for the appellant have no authority to appear. The Apex Council s resolution is in the face of the Supreme Court s aforesaid order and, ex facie, is an interference in these proceedings. The court would not pass any orders, apropos the same, at this stage. The only focus now is to decide the FAO by 22.9.2020, as directed by the Supreme Court - Arguments heard. Order reserved.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Stay of the High Court order dated 17.06.2020, except for certain elections.
2. Removal of counsel representing DDCA.
3. Resolution passed by DDCA's Apex Council interfering with the proceedings.
4. Direction from the Supreme Court to decide the FAO by 22.9.2020.

Analysis:

1. The Supreme Court had stayed the High Court order dated 17.06.2020, except for specific elections. The Supreme Court directed the High Court to expedite the hearing of the FAO and decide the matter finally. The elections were required to continue, and the High Court was instructed to conclude the matter by 23.09.2020. The importance of the case was emphasized, urging the High Court to prioritize the hearing.

2. A resolution passed by DDCA's Apex Council on 13.09.2020 sought to remove the set of counsel who had represented DDCA before the Supreme Court. This move was considered an interference in the proceedings, especially in light of the Supreme Court's order to expedite the FAO hearing. The appellant had been heard on previous dates, with the respondents having concluded their arguments. The appellant was in the process of concluding its rejoinder arguments, emphasizing the urgency of the situation.

3. The appellant, represented by the Additional Solicitor General with a new set of counsel, requested to be heard as the previous counsel were allegedly unauthorized to appear. The Apex Council's resolution was viewed as a direct challenge to the Supreme Court's order and was deemed inappropriate at that stage of the proceedings. The court refrained from passing any immediate orders regarding this matter, maintaining focus on deciding the FAO by the specified date.

4. The primary focus remained on deciding the FAO by 22.9.2020, in accordance with the Supreme Court's directive. The arguments were heard, and the order was reserved for further consideration. The court emphasized the urgency of the situation by ordering the immediate upload of the order on the website and forwarding copies to the counsels via email for prompt dissemination and action.